User talk:Josve05a/Archive 15

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

File:Valaffisch Dansk Folkeparti Morten Messerschmidt 20140515 0663-2 (14064828859).jpg

File:Valaffisch Dansk Folkeparti Morten Messerschmidt 20140515 0663-2 (14064828859).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 10:22, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Melodifestivalen 2025 - Kamikaze Life - Maja Ivarsson 35.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Kallerna 07:07, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted

Congratulations! Melodifestivalen 2025 - Hosts - Keyyo & Edvin Törnblom 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status.

If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates.

We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
Comments
Support Good quality. --Kallerna 07:06, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:44, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

File:Folkemodet Jens Galshiot skulptur 550+1 201511jun. 0013 (18813072645).jpg

File:Folkemodet Jens Galshiot skulptur 550+1 201511jun. 0013 (18813072645).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:53, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 18:02, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

File:Street art - Flickr - gailhampshire.jpg

File:Street art - Flickr - gailhampshire.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

A1Cafel (talk) 03:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 18:02, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

File:ThomasMansfield Logo.jpg

File:ThomasMansfield Logo.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ^{ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ} 19:03, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 18:02, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

File:Ankush00.jpg

File:Ankush00.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Zazaki ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ eesti ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 조선말 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ polski ∙ پښتو ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ shqip ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−

Mitte27 (talk) 12:39, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 18:02, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

DR close

Commons does not override the editorial autonomy of sister projects when it comes to deciding what illustrates their content. It literally did though. Prototyperspective isn't a contributor to the German Wikipedia but added the image to a German language article for Science Fantasy. It's ridiculous to act like the autotomy of another project only matters when keeping an image that was added by a non-contributor but not when deleting it. That's not even the rule anyway. File not legitimately in use clearly lays out places where it doesn't matter. One of those as I said in the DR being "any use that is not made in good faith." It's not a "dispute" over if the image should or shouldn't be in the article. Prototyperspective has an established history of adding AI generated images to other projects as a way to push an agenda. Something that he was reported to ANU for and from what I remember was blocked over. So the usage clearly wasn't made in good faith and your doing the exact opposite of respecting the autonomy of other projects by keeping it. Adamant1 (talk) 00:28, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

I see that you've now also raised this on the Village Pump, where I've already responded. Just for context: in the DR I closed, the image was being used in a relevant article on the German Wikipedia. While the image is newly uploaded and the addition was recent, the fact remains that it is currently in use on a sister project in a contextually appropriate article. Even if it was added to that project to make a point, it is still being used there right now.

As the policy states, “It should be stressed that Commons does not overrule other projects about what is in scope.” I interpreted that in line with both long-standing practice and the intent behind the file usage guideline: namely, that our job is not to police cross-wiki contributions, especially when the other project has not chosen to remove the content.

If someone believes the usage is not appropriate, they are welcome to raise it on that project. If you wish, you can become an editor of the local sister project and remove the image yourself, as long as that’s allowed according to their local rules. However, the removal should not be done as an administrative action from Commons. Unless and until the local community removes it or otherwise indicates it is unwelcome, we should not unilaterally override their editorial choices based on assumptions about intent. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:02, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification in both places. I don't even necessarily disagree. It's tough to raise things like this on other projects as an outsider who doesn't speak the language though. I've tried several times and was just faced with xenophbic behavior. So I try to stick to Commons and what can be done here on our end. I'll consider your suggestion about discussing a revision to clarify how and by whom good faith is judged though. That would probably be a better way to go about then changing the policy to say something specifically about AI or similar. Your probably right that it's more important to respect the autonomy of other projects then the reverse. I just don't like it when people try and use the "in use" clause to game the system. Who knows if that's really what Prototyperspective was doing in this instance though. Regards --Adamant1 (talk) 13:11, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, butting in here, but just wanna say that if an editor adds an image, another can delete it- the rule doesn't say that inuse still applies even if the image gets removed during a dr, nor that involved people can't remove the image from use. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 14:53, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

@Josve05a: Nice to know your cool with Commons hosting copyrighted material. It's a weird position for an admin to take if I'm being honest, but alright. You do you lol. --Adamant1 (talk) 01:25, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Not sure which image or DR you’re referring to, but your comment comes across as needlessly personal and uncivil. I'd appreciate it if we could keep the discussion focused on content and policy, not on assumptions about me or my views. Please refrain from character analysis, it doesn't contribute to constructive dialogue. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 01:32, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure how it's uncivil to apply your own standards when your the one who said we shouldn't police other projects but alright. I certainly didn't mean to insult you by repeating what you said on the Village Pump, all be it in a different context. but you did say that was your position. Personally, if I say I like cats and someone says I like grey ones, cool. I certainly wouldn't take that as an insult. Different strokes for different folks though I guess. --Adamant1 (talk) 01:45, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

I think we’re talking past each other at this point. If you believe misrepresenting someone's words and motives is a productive way to engage, that’s your prerogative, but I’m not interested in that kind of exchange. If you'd rather discuss policy than posture, I’m happy to continue. Otherwise, you're welcome to disengage. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 01:48, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

No offense since your clearly sensitive, but the essay on your talk page and user space came off as exactly that. Honestly, I had planned to just leave things where they were yesterday or at least kept it to the Village Pump and policy. But the essay just seems like a pointless escalation. Your not a regular contributor to the project, you don't have experience in this areas like other people do, and your writing an essay about how we should handle things. I wouldn't normally care but your an authority as an administrator and most of this on your side has been about not policing other people. The fact is that a lot of users on here have absolutely no issue what-so-ever with removing AI generated images from other projects. So your doing the exact thing you supposedly have an issue with. The essay is clearly posturing and not based on policy or respecting the project's autonomy. --Adamant1 (talk) 02:05, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

URAA Karsh photos

This is in relation to the following DRs:

You were right about the principle of the URAA restoration I think, but after noticing the inconsistent dates on file names vs. the descriptions at the Dutch archive, I decided to do a little bit more digging with reverse image search. It turns out both photographs seem to have been taken before 1946 (https://www.npg.org.uk/whatson/display/2011/herbert-morrison-the-cockney-socialist; https://www.ebay.com/itm/193374009378). The file description and file name were both wrong. IronGargoyle (talk) 02:32, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Regarding the eBay listing, it does indeed say that the date of print was 1946, with the negative dating from the 1930s to early 1940s. This suggests the image might not be subject to URAA restoration since it wasn't published before 1946, but I wonder if it might be a case of the print being made in the U.S. (as per the eBay listing), which could change the situation. If it was unpublished until printed in the U.S., U.S. rules might come into play. I'm currently heading to bed, and won't be able to look at this until later tomorrow, or on Monday - would you be willing to perhaps open a COM:UNDEL or something? --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 03:07, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Also, if published in 1946, then it would be PD first on 1 Jan 1997 in Canada (1946+50+1)- hence after the URAA cutoff. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 03:09, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Regarding the other file, the NPG source attributes "Karsh / Camera Press". Camera Press is is one of Britain's top independent picture agencies. Founded in 1947 we represent high profile photographers and agencies worldwide. I wonder if it was first published in the UK and not Canada? If Camera Press claims copyright, could this been photographed in 1943, but published in/after 1947 when that agency had been founded?) Some questions here to answer first...--Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 03:11, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

@IronGargoyle: Given that you did some digging as you stated, do you have any comments regarding the above? --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 19:33, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Acción Democrática.svg

@Josve05a:Hi,this image it's should be deleted or kept? (google translator) AbchyZa22 (talk) 18:07, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

I responded there. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:19, 5 May 2025 (UTC)